New York City Left-Turn Accident Lawyer
You were traveling straight through the intersection when another driver turned left across your path.
Sometimes the turning driver never saw the approaching vehicle. Sometimes they saw it and misjudged how much time they had. Either mistake can leave the approaching driver, motorcyclist, e-bike rider or scooter rider with only seconds—or less—to react.
A safe left turn requires more than seeing an opening. The driver has to identify what is approaching and have enough time to cross its path safely.
- Motor Vehicle Accident Case Results
When someone comes to us after a serious car accident, our focus is on helping them recover the compensation they need to move forward.
$7,000,000
verdict for a client who sustained an injury to her neck requiring surgery due to an automobile accident.
$4,950,000
for a woman struck by a bus resulting in brain injury and disability.
$4,650,000
at trial for a client who was a back seat passenger in South Carolina when a bus driver fell asleep and pushed the plaintiff’s vehicle off of the road.
Before Turning Left, a Driver Has to Know What Is Coming—and Whether There Is Enough Time to Cross
A driver preparing to turn left across opposing traffic has two related problems to solve: identify the traffic approaching through the lanes the turn will cross, and determine whether there is enough time and distance to complete the movem
A left turn across opposing traffic is a judgment made before the vehicle begins crossing the approaching lanes.
The driver first has to determine what is coming.
In New York City, that does not mean looking only for cars and trucks. The approaching traffic may include taxis, buses, motorcycles, bicycles, e-bikes and scooters using the roadway. Some present a smaller visual profile than a passenger car, and some may be traveling near larger vehicles that affect how easily they are noticed.
Once the driver identifies the approaching traffic, there is a second judgment: is there enough time and distance to complete the turn without interfering with it?
New York law addresses that decision directly. Under Vehicle and Traffic Law § 1141, a driver intending to turn left within an intersection or into an alley, private road or driveway must yield to a vehicle approaching from the opposite direction that is already within the intersection or close enough to constitute an immediate hazard.
The statute does not assign a universal number of feet or seconds that makes an approaching vehicle an immediate hazard. The answer depends on the traffic situation.
That is why we look closely at the moment the turning driver committed to the movement. Where was the approaching vehicle? What was its speed and direction? What could the turning driver see? Was anything blocking the view? How long would the turn take? Was the approaching vehicle already so close that crossing its path created a collision risk?
Sometimes the failure is perception: the driver never recognizes the approaching road user.
Sometimes the driver sees the approaching vehicle but makes the wrong judgment about the available gap.
Those are different mistakes, and the evidence that explains them can be different too.
“I Never Saw Them” Raises Another Question: Why Not?
When a turning driver says they never saw the approaching vehicle, motorcycle, e-bike or scooter, the investigation should determine whether that road user was actually concealed, became visible only shortly before the turn, or was available to be seen but overlooked. Photographs, video, sight lines and vehicle positions can help distinguish those situations.
A driver who never sees approaching traffic cannot accurately judge whether there is enough time to cross its path.
That makes “I didn’t see them” important information, but not a complete explanation.
The next question is why.
A motorcycle, e-bike or scooter may occupy less of a driver’s visual field than a car or truck. It may be traveling near or beyond a larger vehicle. A delivery truck, parked SUV, construction equipment, median feature or other obstruction may temporarily conceal approaching traffic. The geometry of the intersection itself can limit the view.
But a smaller vehicle is not necessarily an invisible one.
We want to know what could actually be seen from the turning driver’s position and how that changed as the driver waited or moved forward. Video can sometimes show an approaching rider becoming visible. Photographs and measurements can establish sight lines. The positions of surrounding vehicles may explain whether another vehicle genuinely blocked the view.
There is also a difference between looking and perceiving.
A driver may look toward approaching traffic while concentrating primarily on cars and trucks and fail to recognize a motorcycle, e-bike, scooter or bicycle that is also occupying the roadway. A driver may check once, continue waiting, and begin the turn without checking again even though the traffic picture has changed.
Those possibilities should be investigated rather than assumed.
If an obstruction genuinely prevented the driver from seeing approaching traffic, that may help explain the collision. It can also raise the question of whether the driver should have waited or obtained a better view before crossing a lane that could not be confirmed clear.
The important fact is not simply that the driver says the rider or vehicle was unseen. It is whether the approaching road user could reasonably have been detected before the turn began.
What Does “Immediate Hazard” Mean in a Left-Turn Accident?
New York’s left-turn statute does not define an immediate hazard by a fixed distance or number of seconds. The practical question is whether the approaching vehicle was close enough, given its movement and the circumstances, that the turning driver should have yielded rather than crossing its path.
Drivers make gap judgments constantly.
A vehicle is approaching. The turning driver watches it, estimates the available distance and decides either to wait or to go.
Most of the time, that decision is uneventful. When a serious collision follows, the available gap becomes one of the central facts to reconstruct.
Suppose an approaching vehicle is 200 feet away when a driver begins turning. That number by itself does not answer whether the turn was safe. The approaching vehicle’s speed matters. So does the width of the intersection, the turning vehicle’s movement, traffic conditions and how long the driver will occupy the approaching lane.
The same is true of a closer vehicle traveling more slowly.
Section 1141 therefore uses the concept of an “immediate hazard” rather than prescribing one universal measurement.
In a collision investigation, we may be able to reconstruct the available gap using fixed reference points visible in video, lane markings, crosswalks, building lines, traffic-signal locations, witness observations, vehicle movements and, when available and relevant, electronic vehicle information.
The injured person does not need to know the measurement.
Someone who was suddenly confronted with a car turning across the lane may remember seeing the vehicle begin to move, braking, swerving and the collision. They may have no reliable idea whether they were 70 feet, 120 feet or 180 feet away when the turn began.
There is nothing unusual about that.
Distance and timing are things an investigation can often reconstruct more reliably than a person experiencing an emergency could estimate them.
Both Drivers Can Have a Green Light
A steady circular green light can permit one driver to proceed straight while an opposing driver turns left, but the green light does not necessarily give the turning driver priority over approaching traffic. A protected green arrow creates a different signal situation and should be established from the evidence.
One of the more confusing statements after a left-turn collision is also entirely possible:
“I had a green light.”
“So did I.”
Under Vehicle and Traffic Law § 1111, traffic facing a steady circular green signal may proceed straight or turn unless the movement is otherwise prohibited. Traffic making the turn must still yield to other traffic lawfully within the intersection or adjacent crosswalk.
That means an approaching driver can have a green light while an opposing driver also has a green light and is permitted to attempt a left turn.
Permission to attempt the turn is not the same as priority to cross an immediate hazard.
A protected left-turn arrow is different. Section 1111 permits traffic facing a steady green arrow to cautiously enter the intersection to make the indicated movement, subject to the other yielding obligations contained in the statute.
When the signal is disputed, we therefore want to identify more than its color.
Was the turning driver facing a circular green or a green arrow? Did the intersection use a dedicated left-turn phase? Was the arrow active at that point in the signal cycle? What indications governed the approaching traffic?
Video may answer those questions directly. Other evidence can sometimes establish the signal sequence even when the relevant signal head is not visible in the recording.
The statement “I had green” can be accurate and still leave the central right-of-way question unresolved.
The Damage Shows Where the Vehicles Met. It Does Not Decide Who Had the Right of Way.
An approaching vehicle may strike the side of a car that turned across its lane even though the turning movement created the conflict. Damage location can help reconstruct how far the turn had progressed and how the vehicles came together, but responsibility depends on the events leading to the impact.
Many left-turn collisions produce an intuitive but misleading argument.
The approaching vehicle has front-end damage. The turning vehicle has damage along its passenger side. Because the approaching vehicle physically struck the turning vehicle, someone may describe it as the vehicle that “hit” the other car.
That describes contact. It does not necessarily describe causation.
If a driver turns left directly across an approaching lane, the approaching vehicle may have nowhere to go except into the side of the turning car. The fact that its front bumper made contact first does not tell us whether the turning driver should have yielded.
The damage can still be useful.
A broad side impact may indicate that the turning vehicle had progressed substantially across the approaching lane before contact. A more angled or frontal collision may reflect a different stage of the turn. Vehicle rotation, final positions, debris and roadway evidence can add information about the movement after impact.
Sometimes there is no contact with the turning vehicle at all.
An approaching driver or rider may brake or swerve to avoid the left-turning vehicle and instead strike a curb, barrier, parked vehicle or another road user. The absence of physical contact does not necessarily mean the turning movement played no role in creating the emergency.
A 2026 New York court considered precisely that type of issue in a case involving an alleged left turn and an evasive swerve. The court recognized that an attempted left turn can remain relevant to causation when it sets in motion defensive action by the approaching driver.
For us, the practical lesson is straightforward: reconstruct the movement that created the emergency rather than assigning responsibility from the final point of contact alone.
How We Reconstruct the Moment the Left Turn Began
The most important evidence may show the vehicles before impact: where the approaching vehicle was, when the turning vehicle began moving, what each driver could see and how much time remained. Video, witnesses, roadway geometry, physical evidence and electronic vehicle information can be considered together to reconstruct that sequence.
The key moment in many left-turn cases occurs before there is any vehicle damage.
It is the moment the driver commits to crossing the approaching path.
We look for evidence that can take us back to it.
Depending on the collision, that may include:
- Video of the approaches. Storefront, building, dashcam, bus, taxi, rideshare or other recordings may show where the vehicles were before the turn began even when the impact itself is outside the camera’s view.
- Traffic signals and controls. Signal heads, protected arrows, lane-use signs, pavement arrows and other controls help establish which movements were permitted.
- Independent witnesses. A person who saw the turning vehicle waiting, watched the approaching traffic or observed the turn begin may provide information that neither driver could see from inside the vehicles.
- Fixed roadway reference points. Crosswalks, lane markings, poles, building edges and other stationary features can help establish distance and position from photographs or video.
- Vehicle damage and roadway evidence. Impact location, debris, tire evidence and final positions can help test whether the physical sequence is consistent with the accounts being given.
- Electronic vehicle information. When available and relevant, vehicle data may provide information concerning speed, braking, throttle or other events around the collision.
- Sight-line evidence. Photographs, measurements and video can help establish whether an approaching car, motorcycle, e-bike, scooter or cyclist was visible before the driver began turning.
No single item has to reconstruct the entire collision.
One camera may establish where the approaching vehicle was. A witness may establish when the turn began. Roadway measurements may help convert those observations into distance. Vehicle data may provide additional information about braking or speed.
The goal is to build the sequence from evidence rather than expecting an injured person to have measured it while the collision was happening.
Why Injured New Yorkers Trust Us
1.
Decades of NYC Personal Injury Experience
For more than 70 years, our firm has represented injured New Yorkers in serious personal injury and motor vehicle accident cases. We understand how insurance companies evaluate claims and how to build cases that withstand scrutiny.
2.
Handling Complex NYC Car Accident Cases
Our attorneys represent victims injured in car accidents, truck collisions, rideshare crashes, pedestrian accidents, bicycle accidents, hit-and-run collisions, and other serious traffic-related incidents throughout New York City.
3.
Downtown Manhattan Office Serving All Five Boroughs
Located in Lower Manhattan, our office is easily accessible from throughout New York City. We represent clients across Manhattan, Brooklyn, Queens, the Bronx, and Staten Island and can move quickly to preserve evidence after a serious crash.
4.
Proven Results In Serious Injury Cases
Our attorneys have secured significant verdicts and settlements in cases involving automobile accidents, pedestrian injuries, truck collisions, bus crashes, and other catastrophic injury matters throughout New York.
5.
No Fee Unless We Recover Compensation
We handle car accident cases on a contingency fee basis. You pay no legal fees unless we recover compensation on your behalf.
Meet Our New York City Car Accident Attorneys
For decades, the attorneys at Pazer Epstein Jaffe Fein & Gozenput have represented individuals and families throughout New York City in serious personal injury and motor vehicle accident cases. Our legal team combines extensive courtroom experience, strategic case preparation, and a commitment to personalized client service to help accident victims pursue the compensation they deserve.
Michael Jaffe
Partner
MOTOR VEHICLE ACCIDENT LITIGATION
Representing injured car accident victims throughout New York City.
Matthew J. Fein
Partner
MOTOR VEHICLE ACCIDENT LITIGATION
Helping clients pursue compensation after serious motor vehicle accidents.
Eugene Gozenput
Partner
MOTOR VEHICLE ACCIDENT LITIGATION
Advocating for injury victims throughout Manhattan and the five boroughs.
A Turn Signal Announces an Intention. It Does Not Create the Right of Way.
Using a turn signal tells other road users that a driver intends to turn. It does not give that driver priority to cross approaching traffic. New York separately requires turning movements to be made with reasonable safety and requires left-turning drivers to yield when opposing traffic constitutes an immediate hazard.
A driver may say, “But I had my blinker on.”
That can be relevant. It does not answer whether the turn was safe.
Vehicle and Traffic Law § 1163 requires a driver to make a turning movement only when it can be made with reasonable safety and to give the appropriate signal. When required, the turn signal generally must be given continuously during at least the final 100 feet traveled before the turn.
Section 1141 imposes a separate obligation to yield to opposing traffic that is within the intersection or close enough to constitute an immediate hazard.
Those rules do different work.
The signal communicates what the driver intends to do. The right-of-way rule governs whether the driver may safely cross the approaching vehicle’s path at that time.
A driver can therefore signal correctly and still make an unsafe left turn.
Failure to signal can matter for a different reason. An approaching driver who receives no warning that another vehicle intends to turn may have less opportunity to recognize the developing hazard. Whether that contributed to a particular collision depends on the timing and circumstances.
The important distinction is simple: signaling a left turn does not reserve the intersection.
When the Turning Driver Says the Approaching Vehicle Was Speeding
Speed can affect whether an approaching vehicle constituted an immediate hazard and whether either driver had time to react. But an allegation that someone “must have been speeding” should be tested against evidence rather than inferred solely from the severity of the collision.
A common response to a left-turn claim is that the approaching vehicle was traveling too fast.
Sometimes speed is genuinely part of the collision.
New York’s speed law requires drivers to operate at a reasonable and prudent speed under the conditions and to use appropriate care when approaching and crossing intersections.
But speed should not become an assumption simply because a serious impact occurred.
We want to know what supports the allegation.
Video may permit speed analysis using known distances and elapsed time. Electronic vehicle information may be available in some cases. Witness observations, braking evidence, vehicle movements and other physical evidence can contribute as well.
Speed also has to be considered together with the turning driver’s decision.
If an approaching vehicle was moving faster than permitted, that may affect the available time and comparative-fault analysis. It does not automatically establish that the left-turning driver was free to cross its path. The question remains what the turning driver could see and whether the approaching traffic constituted an immediate hazard when the turn began.
The same discipline applies to allegations that the approaching driver was distracted or reacted too slowly.
Those may be legitimate issues. They need evidence.
New York City Is Physically Changing the Way Drivers Make Left Turns
NYC DOT’s Turn Calming Program changes the path and speed of turning vehicles at selected intersections. The program began as part of the city’s Left Turn Study Action Plan addressing failure-to-yield crashes caused by left-turning vehicles and had reached 1,236 intersections citywide by the end of 2025.
New York City has treated left-turn safety as more than a matter of signs and enforcement.
NYC DOT’s Turn Calming Program uses physical intersection treatments to slow turns and guide vehicles through a safer path. DOT says the program began as part of its Left Turn Study Action Plan to address failure-to-yield crashes caused by left-turning vehicles.
As of December 31, 2025, DOT reported turn-calming treatments at 1,236 intersections citywide.
Treatments can include hardened centerlines, rubber curbs, bollards, speed bumps, median extensions and other designs that change how sharply or quickly a driver can turn.
DOT reports that at treated intersections:
- median left-turn speeds decreased by 54.3 percent;
- average left-turn speeds decreased by 52.6 percent;
- 85th-percentile left-turn speeds decreased by 59.8 percent;
- pedestrian injuries decreased by 18 percent; and
- severe pedestrian injuries decreased by 33 percent.
DOT also reports substantial reductions in vehicles crossing the double yellow line while turning at locations where certain treatments extend toward the stop bar or crosswalk.
Those statistics do not establish responsibility for an individual collision.
They illustrate something important about the mechanics of the turn itself. The path and speed of a left turn affect how much time a driver has to observe the intersection, how the vehicle approaches a conflict point and how other road users experience the movement.
The design of the particular intersection can therefore be relevant to understanding the collision, especially when sight lines, turning speed or vehicle path are disputed.
Could You Have Avoided the Left-Turning Vehicle?
Whether an approaching driver or rider could reasonably have avoided a left-turn collision depends on when the turning movement became a recognizable hazard, the available time and distance, and whether braking or an evasive maneuver could be made safely. The right of way does not create unlimited reaction time.
After a collision, it is easy to identify the moment when everyone wishes the approaching driver had braked or swerved.
The more useful question is when that response became reasonably possible.
An approaching driver ordinarily has reason to expect an opposing vehicle to yield before turning across an immediate hazard. A vehicle waiting to turn left is not itself an emergency. The danger develops when that vehicle begins moving into the approaching path under circumstances that make a collision likely.
By then, the available choices may be limited.
Braking takes distance. Swerving requires a safe place to go. Another traffic lane may be occupied. A cyclist, e-bike or scooter may be alongside the vehicle. Pedestrians may be near the curb or in the crosswalk. Moving left can be particularly dangerous if the turning driver is still progressing through that same space.
Motorcyclists face their own limitations. A rider confronted with a vehicle suddenly crossing the lane has to manage braking, balance, traction and any possible escape path in the time available.
That is why an insurer’s suggestion that someone “should have avoided it” needs to be examined against the actual sequence.
We look at when the turn began, when the approaching road user could reasonably recognize that the driver was not going to yield, the distance remaining and the safe options that actually existed at that moment.
Evidence of the Turn Can Disappear Even When the Intersection Does Not
Surveillance can be overwritten, vehicles repaired, witnesses lost and temporary sight obstructions moved. Preserving evidence early can be especially important when the dispute involves what the turning driver could see, how far away the approaching road user was or whether another vehicle obstructed the view.
The intersection may look essentially the same a month after the collision while one of the most important conditions has disappeared.
A delivery truck that blocked part of the driver’s view may be gone within minutes. Construction equipment may move. Temporary barriers can change. Parked vehicles occupying the curb near the intersection will be different.
Video presents a different problem. The camera may remain mounted on the building while the recording from the collision has already been overwritten.
Vehicles are repaired or salvaged. Witnesses become difficult to locate. Roadway debris is removed.
The evidence worth preserving depends on the dispute.
If the turning driver says a motorcycle was hidden behind another vehicle, video of the approaches may be particularly valuable. If speed is disputed, recordings with fixed reference points or available electronic vehicle information may matter. If the driver says a truck blocked the view, photographs or video showing that obstruction can help establish exactly what was visible.
Potential evidence can include:
- surveillance, dashcam and other available video;
- independent witness identities and contact information;
- photographs of sight lines and temporary obstructions;
- traffic-signal and protected-arrow information;
- roadway markings and intersection geometry;
- vehicle damage and relevant physical evidence; and
- available electronic vehicle information when appropriate.
Preservation does not mean deciding in advance what the evidence will prove.
It means making sure the evidence is still available when that question needs to be answered.
What to Do After a Serious Left-Turn Accident in New York City
Your health and immediate safety come first. Obtain appropriate medical care, make sure the collision is reported when required, and preserve photographs, witnesses and potential video when safely possible. Describe what you actually remember without guessing about speed, distance or the number of seconds before impact.
A left-turn collision can develop so quickly that the approaching driver or rider remembers the other vehicle beginning to turn and little else before impact.
That is not unusual.
If your condition and circumstances permit, several practical steps can help protect your health and preserve useful information:
- Get appropriate medical attention. Tell your medical providers accurately what you are experiencing and follow the care recommended for your injuries.
- Make sure the collision is reported when required. A police response can document the people and vehicles involved, identify witnesses and record information about the intersection.
- Photograph the traffic environment when it is safe to do so. Include the vehicles, intersection, signal heads, turn arrows, lane markings, crosswalks and the directions from which the vehicles approached.
- Document anything affecting visibility. A parked truck, construction equipment or other obstruction may not be there later.
- Preserve witness information. Someone nearby may have seen the turning vehicle waiting, the approaching traffic or the moment the turn began.
- Identify possible cameras. Buildings, businesses, buses, taxis, rideshare vehicles, delivery vehicles and dashcams may have captured the approaches even if they did not record the impact.
- Say what you actually remember. If you do not know your exact speed or how many feet separated you from the turning vehicle, do not invent a number.
- Be cautious about detailed insurance statements before the facts are clear. You can describe what happened truthfully without accepting another person’s reconstruction of the collision.
You may know that you had a green light without knowing whether the other driver had a circular green or protected arrow.
You may know that the vehicle turned directly across your lane without knowing how many seconds separated the beginning of the turn from impact.
You may be a motorcyclist who saw the driver’s face or vehicle begin to move but have no idea whether the driver ever saw you.
Those gaps in memory do not prevent the collision from being investigated. They tell us which facts need to be established from other evidence.
Frequently Asked Questions About Left-Turn Accidents in New York City
Is the left-turning driver always responsible for the collision?
No. The left-turning driver has important yielding obligations, but responsibility depends on the circumstances. Signal indications, the position and movement of approaching traffic, speed, visibility and the conduct of both road users may all matter.
What does New York law require when a driver turns left?
Under VTL § 1141, a driver intending to turn left within an intersection or into an alley, private road or driveway must yield to opposing traffic already within the intersection or close enough to constitute an immediate hazard.
Can both drivers have a green light in a left-turn accident?
Yes. A steady circular green can permit both straight traffic and an opposing left turn. The turning driver must still comply with the applicable yielding obligations. A protected green arrow presents a different signal situation, which is why identifying the actual signal indications can be important.
What if the other driver had a green left-turn arrow?
A protected arrow can materially change the right-of-way analysis. The signal sequence, the indications facing each direction and when each vehicle entered the intersection should be established from the available evidence rather than assumed from memory alone.
Does it matter that my car hit the side of the turning vehicle?
The location of the damage can help reconstruct the collision, but it does not by itself establish who had the right of way. An approaching vehicle may strike the side of a car that turned directly across its path because that is where the vehicles happened to meet.
What if I swerved to avoid the turning car and never hit it?
Physical contact with the turning vehicle is not necessarily required for its movement to be relevant. A driver who turns across approaching traffic can create an emergency that causes another driver or rider to take evasive action and collide elsewhere. The evidence needs to establish the sequence and causal relationship.
What if the driver says they never saw my motorcycle?
That makes visibility a central issue. We would want to determine what could be seen from the turning driver’s position, whether another vehicle or obstruction concealed the motorcycle, when it became visible and whether it was available to be seen before the turn began.
Does the same analysis apply to an e-bike or scooter traveling in the roadway?
The precise legal rules can depend on the road user and circumstances, but the visibility problem can be very similar. A driver turning across a lane needs to account for the traffic actually approaching through that space, which may include e-bikes, scooters, bicycles and motorcycles as well as cars and trucks.
What if a truck or SUV blocked the driver's view?
An obstruction may explain why approaching traffic was difficult to see. It does not automatically establish that it was safe to turn. The investigation should determine what the driver could see, whether the obstruction changed, and whether the driver had a reasonable way to obtain a better view before crossing the lane.
Does using a turn signal give the driver the right of way?
No. A turn signal communicates an intention to turn. It does not give the driver priority over opposing traffic. New York separately requires the movement to be made with reasonable safety and requires a left-turning driver to yield when approaching traffic constitutes an immediate hazard.
What if the turning driver says I was speeding?
Speed can matter, but the allegation needs evidence. Video, known distances, electronic vehicle information, witness observations and physical evidence may help determine whether speed contributed to the collision. A serious impact alone does not establish how fast a vehicle was traveling.
What if there is no video of the accident?
Video is only one source of evidence. Witnesses, traffic controls, photographs, sight lines, vehicle damage, roadway evidence, signal information and available electronic vehicle data may also help reconstruct the turn.
Can a left turn into a driveway or parking garage cause the same type of claim?
Yes. VTL § 1141 applies not only to left turns at intersections but also to left turns into alleys, private roads and driveways when opposing traffic is within the intersection or close enough to constitute an immediate hazard.
What if I had the right of way but the insurance company says I should have avoided the crash?
That depends on when the danger became apparent and what options actually existed. Braking and evasive maneuvers require time, distance and a safe path. We examine the collision as it developed rather than assuming an alternative maneuver was available simply because it can be imagined afterward.
What if I was partly responsible for the accident?
Shared responsibility can affect recovery.
Under the current version of CPLR § 1411, claimant fault generally reduces recoverable damages in proportion to that fault. In a personal injury action subject to Article 51 of the Insurance Law, however, recovery is barred when the claimant’s culpable conduct is greater than that of the person—or combined persons—from whom recovery is sought.
That makes allegations concerning speed, distraction, signal compliance or avoidability important to investigate carefully.
Who pays my medical expenses after a left-turn accident?
New York’s No-Fault system generally provides first-party benefits for qualifying economic losses arising from a covered motor vehicle accident without requiring you first to establish that another driver caused the collision. Insurance Law § 5102 currently defines basic economic loss as up to $50,000 per person in combined qualifying losses, subject to the statute’s limitations. The applicable source of benefits depends on your status and the circumstances of the accident.
Can I recover compensation for pain and suffering?
Potentially. For claims between covered persons arising from negligence in the use or operation of a motor vehicle, Insurance Law § 5104 generally requires a serious injury before non-economic loss such as pain and suffering can be recovered.
The current definition of serious injury in § 5102(d) includes death, dismemberment, significant disfigurement, fracture, loss of a fetus, permanent loss of use, permanent consequential limitation and significant limitation of use as specified in the statute.
Whether an injury satisfies that definition depends on the medical evidence and circumstances of the individual case.
How quickly should a serious left-turn collision be investigated?
As soon as reasonably practical when important evidence may be temporary. Surveillance can be overwritten, witnesses become difficult to locate, vehicles may be repaired and sight obstructions can disappear. Early preservation can be particularly important when visibility, speed or the available gap is disputed.
A Left-Turn Case Often Comes Down to the Decision Made Before the Driver Crossed Your Path
The turning driver may not have seen you. They may have seen you and believed there was enough time. They may say your speed made the collision unavoidable or that you should have reacted differently.
Those are questions that can be investigated.
We examine what the turning driver could see, what traffic was approaching, when the turn began, how much time and distance were available, what the signals permitted and what the physical and electronic evidence can establish about the movements before impact.
Whether you were driving a car, riding a motorcycle, or traveling through the roadway on an e-bike or scooter, the investigation should account for the traffic environment that actually existed—not the one someone reconstructs afterward to explain why they turned.
If you were seriously injured when another driver turned left across your path in New York City, we are available to speak with you about what happened and what should come next.
Talk To Us For FreeServing Accident Victims Throughout New York City From Our Lower Manhattan Office
Pazer Epstein Jaffe Fein & Gozenput represents injury victims throughout Manhattan, Brooklyn, Queens, the Bronx, and Staten Island from our office at 20 Vesey Street in Lower Manhattan. Conveniently located near multiple major subway lines and transportation hubs, our office is easily accessible to clients across New York City seeking experienced legal representation after a serious accident.
Our Downtown Manhattan Office
Pazer Epstein Jaffe Fein & Gozenput, P.C.
20 Vesey Street, Suite 700
New York, NY 10007
917-983-2343
Our firm is located in downtown Manhattan, just steps from major subway lines serving every borough of New York City. Being based in Lower Manhattan allows us to stay closely connected to the courts, agencies, and neighborhoods where serious personal injury cases are handled, while remaining easy to reach for clients traveling from throughout the city.
Getting to Our Manhattan Office by Subway
Our Lower Manhattan office at 20 Vesey Street is conveniently located near several major subway stations serving Manhattan, Brooklyn, Queens, and the Bronx. Clients visiting our office can easily reach us using the A, C, E, 2, 3, 4, 5, J, and Z lines, with multiple stations located just a short walk away.
Fulton Street Station
A
C
E
2
3
4
5
J
Z
Approx. 2–4 minute walk
Park Place Station
2
3
Approx. 3-5 minute walk
Wall Street Station
2
3
Approx. 5-7 minute walk
Chambers Street Station
J
Z
Approx. 5-7 minute walk